This thesis explores the research question: How can water governance be fairer and more effective in Mekong Region and beyond? In doing so, it examines the theory and practice of deliberative water governance, informed and illustrated in a region that comprises Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, Vietnam and China's Yunnan Province.
Water governance can be understood along a spectrum, from a means to achieve pre{u00AD}determined objectives to a social process of dialogue, negotiation and decision-making. This thesis is most interested in the latter conception, in the context of 'the Mekong', where choices are being made about using and sharing transboundary waters. These choices might produce more energy; both increase and decrease food production; sustain or threaten livelihoods; and, maintain or degrade vital ecosystems and their services, upon which societies depend.
An introductory chapter (Part A, Chapter 1) contextualises and explains the logic of the research. I next explore contested waterscapes (Part B, Chapters 2-5) focusing on the complex tapestry of Mekong regionalisms and governance, hydropower expansion, and a marginalised Mekong River Commission. The analysis confirmed that significant scope exists for improving water governance, and that deliberation - debate and discussion aimed at producing reasonable, well-informed opinions - has been in short supply.
Deliberation deficits observed and reported in Part B provoked exploration of deliberative processes (Part C, Chapters 6-11) as a potential pathway to improving water governance. I examine firstly international practice, including still-topical issues from the World Commission on Dams, and the potential of multi-stakeholder platforms. I then examine Mekong practice and the efficacy of multi-stakeholder platforms as a governance tool; and the politics of deliberation, scales and levels. The final chapter of this section introduces a framework for analysing transboundary water governance complexes and distils suggestions for making water governance more deliberative and as a consequence, fairer and more effective.
Part C analyses a range of governance challenges, and provides evidence that deliberative processes, where inserted into political arenas, are making water governance fairer and more effective, by reducing power imbalances among stakeholders and assisting negotiations to be more transparent and informed.
In the final section and chapter (Part D, Chapter 12), I summarise and reflect on my practice and exploration of the topics. Drawing together the lessons from my research, I present my aspirational vision of Deliberative Water Governance - a new frontier in the field of deliberative governance: Constructive engagement that enables fairer and more effective water governance through inclusive, deliberative processes that emphasise different perspectives, learning, analysis and institution-building.
The vision is inspired by promising examples, from the Mekong Region and elsewhere, examined in the thesis chapters, which demonstrate the need for and added-value provided by deliberation when it is information-rich, flexibly facilitated and actively promotes analysis of different views. In conclusion, I contend that, via its action research and publishing orientation, this thesis has contributed uniquely to both the theory and practice of Deliberative Water Governance in the dynamic Mekong Region and more widely
